CWP-6854-2021

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

(225)

CWP-6854-2021

Date of Decision : April 22, 2022

Dharamvir Singh

.. Petitioner

Versus

Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. and another

.. Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present:

Mr. B. K. Bagri, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

Mr. Narender Singh Behgal, AAG, Haryana.

HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI J. (ORAL)

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the

prayer that the respondents may kindly be directed to count the daily wage

service which the petitioner had rendered from 01.06.1983 till 30.12.1992

as a qualifying service for computing the pensionary benefits.

After notice of motion, the respondents have appeared and have

stated that on reconsideration, the claim of the petitioner was found

meritorious and the said benefit has already been extended to him and his

pensionary benefits have been recalculated and the arrears of the same have

already been extended to the petitioner.

SATYAWAN

2022.04.26 15:59

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

CWP-6854-2021

2

The learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the fact

that the petitioner has already been extended the benefits, however, submits

that as the petitioner had retired from service on attaining the age of

superannuation on 31.08.2018 whereas the benefits have been given to him

in the year 2022 i.e. after more than 3½ years of his retirement hence, the

petitioner is entitled for the grant of interest on the said amount.

The learned counsel for the respondents contest the claim of the

petitioner for the grant of interest on the ground that as and when, the

grievance was raised by the petitioner, the same was looked into and

appropriate order was passed and therefore, the petitioner's claim for grant

of interest may kindly be declined.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone

through the record with their able assistance.

Keeping in view the principle of law settled by the Full Bench

of this Court in 'Kesar Chand Vs. State of Punjab and others', AIR 1988

Punjab 265 wherein, it has been settled that the daily wage service rendered

by an employee prior to regularization of his services is to be taken into

account as a qualifying service for computing the pensionary benefits, it was

incumbent upon the respondents themselves to take into account the same,

when the petitioner retired in the year 2018. It is not the case of the

respondents that the respondents did not know about the factual aspect that

the petitioner had discharged the duties on daily wage basis prior to the

regularization of his services. That being so, the benefit, which the

petitioner was entitled for at the time of his retirement, was not extended to

him by the respondents and the delaying in the release of the benefits is

attributable to the respondents only.

SATYAWAN

2022.04.26 15:59

I attest to the accuracy and

authenticity of this document

CWP-6854-2021

3

A Co-ordinate bench of this Court in J.S. Cheema Vs. State of

Haryana, 2014(13) RCR (Civil) 355, had held that an employee will be

entitled for the interest on an amount which has been retained by the

respondents without any valid justification. The relevant paragraph of J.S.

Cheema's case (supra) is as under: -

“In my opinion, even if the assertion made in the written

statement is presumed to be correct it would not disentitle the

petitioner for claiming interest. The jurisprudential basis for

grant of interest is the fact that one person's money has been

used by somebody else. It is in that sense rent for the usage of

money. If the user is compounded by any negligence on the

part of the person with whom the money is lying it may result

in higher rate because then it can also include the component

of damages (in the form of interest). In the circumstances, even

if there is no negligence on the part of the State it cannot be

denied